Review of Son of the Mask (2005) by Kimberly P — 07 May 2016

I kind of enjoyed it. Sort of.

I mean, I like it a lot more looking back then I did initially when I watched it.

I think what I like about it, is it's dark humour and the fact it tries to be it's own story without *gasp* Jim Carrey. Which honestly, I feel like The Mask is a story that needs a different protagonist if you're going to make a sequel. Seriously, why have a mask that can give anybody super powers if you're only going to have one guy ever use it.

That being said, they should have gotten someone actually funny using the mask. Like, maybe someone who's an actually comedian? I don't know.

The baby and dog plot could have been explained a little better. Like how can a baby be born of a mask? I mean, I get the whole it was worn while they had sex, but I don't know, it seems to be a weird power it suddenly has. Also, how come the baby is so smart and psychotic? Is just cause he has mask power ? It kind of makes sense (especially if you read the comics) but again, you can't just throw that at an audience and expect them to accept that (or still like the baby character).

Also, that dog is way too smart. I know Milo from the first movie was crazy smart but the dog is like way too aware of everything (and why did Tim make him his own room, that's just crazy devotion to your dog there).

I don't know if I like Loki's inclusion or not. On the one hand he's kind of funny and Loki makes sense in this universe cause we established in the last film he made the mask. On the other hand he's a weak villain and you might not like Loki, god of mischief, to portrayed by essentially a teenage brat that never grew up (though, I guess that's what the Marvel universe's Loki is like too *sting*).

I think the plot is okay if not meandering at the beginning, but the first Mask meandered too and nobody thought ill of it. While we're comparing the two, they both had pretty weak villains (though Loki is arguably more interesting than Dorian).

And before anybody gets all riled up, I'm not saying this is as good as the Mask. It's not. If I were to give them grades I would give this movie a C and The Mask a B+. The Mask is by far the better film though I think if it didn't have Jim Carrey, the script would fail (much like how Iron Man would have failed if not for Robert Downey Junior).

However Son of the Mask, has no saving grace. The story doesn't really take off until the second half, and if you're not the type to like dark humour (like me) you're going to hate it. That's why I give this a three star, because it's something I like a guilty pleasure but I don't think it's one of those things that really warrants anything above average.

There's a lot left to say but I think the gist is gotten. The last thing I will say is that visually it's a mess. There are some okay visuals there (though again, if you don't like creepy imagery, you're going to hate it) but there's a lot of it that feels and looks extremely cheap. It also lacks a lot of creativity that the mask had. Half of the stuff I've seen here I've seen elsewhere in other movies.

And that's where The Mask really does shine above this because it's not just creative but the effects really hold the test of time. So as a sequel to that movie it fails, but if you look at it alone, it's alright.